Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [existlist] Re: significant difference

Expand Messages
  • eduardathome
    [First one must become a conscious, well-knit, individualised being, who exists in himself, by himself, independently of all his surroundings, who can hear
    Message 1 of 9 , Feb 11, 2013
      [First one must become a conscious, well-knit, individualised being, who
      exists in himself, by himself, independently of all his surroundings,
      who can hear anything, read anything, see anything without changing. He
      receives from outside only what he wants to receive; he automatically
      refuses all that is not in conformity with his plan and nothing can
      leave an imprint on him unless he agrees to receive the imprint. Then
      one begins to become an individuality!]

      Nothing new there. That is what a mature person does ... avoids being
      carrying away by distractions ... and focusing on what is important.

      However, it is also a recipe for a self-indulged isolated hermit, which is
      not a good path to undertake.

      eduard

      -----Original Message-----
      From: devindersingh
      Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 10:16 PM
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [existlist] Re: significant difference

      Do you know what it means to be completely individualised? Capable of
      resisting all outer influences?...at least ninety-nine parts of an
      individual's character are made of soft butter – inedible of
      course... but on which if one presses one's thumb, an imprint is made.
      Now, everything is a "thumb": an expressed thought, a sentence read, an
      object looked at, an observation of what someone else does, and of one's
      neighbour's will. And all these wills... you know, when one sees them
      they are all there, like this, inter- mingled, each one trying to get
      the uppermost and causing a kind of perpetual conflict within,
      outside... It goes in and out of people like that, you see, like
      electric currents. One is not at all aware of all this, and it is a
      perpetual conflict of all the wills which are trying to express
      themselves; and the strongest one will succeed. But as there are many of
      these and as one has to fight alone against a great number, it is not
      easy.


      So one is tossed like a cork on the waves of the sea... One day one
      wants this, the next day one wants that, at one moment one is pushed
      from this side, at another from that, now one lifts one's face to the
      sky, now one is sunk deep in a hole. And so this is the existence one
      has!

      First one must become a conscious, well-knit, individualised being, who
      exists in himself, by himself, independently of all his surroundings,
      who can hear anything, read anything, see anything without changing. He
      receives from outside only what he wants to receive; he automatically
      refuses all that is not in conformity with his plan and nothing can
      leave an imprint on him unless he agrees to receive the imprint. Then
      one begins to become an individuality!

      inance.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheBecoming/message/553

      http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheBecoming/message/3057
      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" wrote:
      >
      > But eduard what you've just now espoused is radical individualism, and
      it conflicts with what wrote you wrote previously: "I am not advocating
      radical individualism. There are shared ideas and also ideas which may
      differ between individuals and for which there may be disagreement. In a
      civilized society we try to deal with our disagreements." I don't
      understand your concern with the authenticity of evil. What is society
      except others? Authenticity is a relationship not only with yourself but
      with others. Together with freedom and responsibility they are
      existentialist touchstones. Evil matters, but not because it's
      authentic.
      >
      > Mary
      >
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
      > >
      > > Why??
      > >
      > > Why should we have to consider whether the authentically evil person
      is
      > > responsible for someone else?? What has the "other" got to do with
      > > anything?? You are authentic if you act as you think or believe.
      Simple.
      > > Period. If you are inclined to evil and it is in your character, why
      should
      > > we have to add the further qualification of whether there is some
      "other" in
      > > the mix??
      > >
      > > You are adding all sorts of qualifications without explaining how
      these
      > > matter.
      > >
      > > eduard
      > >
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From: Mary
      > > Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 1:10 PM
      > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > > Subject: [existlist] significant difference
      > >
      > > The existentialist proof for whether someone is acting authentically
      is
      > > whether they acknowledge intersubjectivity. An authentically evil
      person is
      > > responsible for whom? To what is he committed other than acting at
      the
      > > expense of others' freedom. To attribute the isolated concepts of
      > > authenticity, freedom, and responsibility to an evil person is to
      ignore
      > > whether these concepts are merged within that person and whether
      that person
      > > values them enough to respect them in others.
      > >
      > > Mary



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      ------------------------------------

      Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

      Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
    • devindersingh
      What came out existed already there essentially within what was. It is nothing but the quickening of the seed, the growth of the embryo and the birth out of
      Message 2 of 9 , Feb 12, 2013
        What came out existed already there essentially within what was. It is nothing but the quickening of the seed, the growth of the embryo and the birth out of the womb: Life was imbedded in Matter, Mind was imbedded in Life and therefore in Matter. Thus evolution is merely self-manifestation, the urge to bring out step by step all the degrees of potency involved in the being. The force of evolution is selective and directive, as has been pointed out by Julian Huxley.
        With man came also the sense of what is beyond man, the superman, the divine man, the Divine. That is the true meaning of his appearance, that is the characteristic turn of consciousness which he brought with him. This self-consciousness, an inner perception and aspiration that he is to be something else, something other and greater than what he is, means the emergence of a spiritual soul in the world of matter. This prophetic or forward-looking consciousness is absent in the sub-human creation, although, as I have said, a secret blind unknowing forward urge has always been there as the original motive of all functioning in things and creatures upon earth.
        [Existentialists]assert even now that to be ignorant is human: to be born, to live and to decay and die – sasyam iva pacyate sasyam iva jayate punah – that is the inevitable course of earthly life. If you want to be superhuman, you must get beyond the human frame altogether, 'not here, not here, but elsewhere'. That has been the burden more or less of all religions, all spiritual attempts and achievements so far.
        We, have said that this does not seen to lead to the right solution of the riddle, for it means merely a by-passing, an escape. The true solution must concern itself with here and now. And we have also said that the earth and human life are inevitably moving towards that solution, for it is that solution which the evolutionary urge is carrying within itself to offer to earth and human life, viz., to establish the Divine in the human frame, to incarnate the spirit-life in the manifest form of the earthly body.
        ...the red seed of the French Revolution was planted the very day when the Valois autocrat declared his divine right of kingship. In Russia, Lenin's antithesis was posited along with Peter the Great's thesis.
        ...the New Being, the Superman, will be born, whether breaking the mould that humanity is or reshaping it into the new pattern.
        [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-7/-46_The%20Evolutionary%20Imperative.htm]
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
        >
        > [First one must become a conscious, well-knit, individualised being, who
        > exists in himself, by himself, independently of all his surroundings,
        > who can hear anything, read anything, see anything without changing. He
        > receives from outside only what he wants to receive; he automatically
        > refuses all that is not in conformity with his plan and nothing can
        > leave an imprint on him unless he agrees to receive the imprint. Then
        > one begins to become an individuality!]
        >
        > Nothing new there. That is what a mature person does ... avoids being
        > carrying away by distractions ... and focusing on what is important.
        >
        > However, it is also a recipe for a self-indulged isolated hermit, which is
        > not a good path to undertake.
        >
        > eduard
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: devindersingh
        > Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 10:16 PM
        > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [existlist] Re: significant difference
        >
        > Do you know what it means to be completely individualised? Capable of
        > resisting all outer influences?...at least ninety-nine parts of an
        > individual's character are made of soft butter â€" inedible of
        > course... but on which if one presses one's thumb, an imprint is made.
        > Now, everything is a "thumb": an expressed thought, a sentence read, an
        > object looked at, an observation of what someone else does, and of one's
        > neighbour's will. And all these wills... you know, when one sees them
        > they are all there, like this, inter- mingled, each one trying to get
        > the uppermost and causing a kind of perpetual conflict within,
        > outside... It goes in and out of people like that, you see, like
        > electric currents. One is not at all aware of all this, and it is a
        > perpetual conflict of all the wills which are trying to express
        > themselves; and the strongest one will succeed. But as there are many of
        > these and as one has to fight alone against a great number, it is not
        > easy.
        > So one is tossed like a cork on the waves of the sea... One day one
        > wants this, the next day one wants that, at one moment one is pushed
        > from this side, at another from that, now one lifts one's face to the
        > sky, now one is sunk deep in a hole. And so this is the existence one
        > has!
        > First one must become a conscious, well-knit, individualised being, who
        > exists in himself, by himself, independently of all his surroundings,
        > who can hear anything, read anything, see anything without changing. He
        > receives from outside only what he wants to receive; he automatically
        > refuses all that is not in conformity with his plan and nothing can
        > leave an imprint on him unless he agrees to receive the imprint. Then
        > one begins to become an individuality!
        >
        > http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheBecoming/message/553
        >
        > http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheBecoming/message/3057
        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" wrote:
        > >
        > > But eduard what you've just now espoused is radical individualism, and
        > it conflicts with what wrote you wrote previously: "I am not advocating
        > radical individualism. There are shared ideas and also ideas which may
        > differ between individuals and for which there may be disagreement. In a
        > civilized society we try to deal with our disagreements." I don't
        > understand your concern with the authenticity of evil. What is society
        > except others? Authenticity is a relationship not only with yourself but
        > with others. Together with freedom and responsibility they are
        > existentialist touchstones. Evil matters, but not because it's
        > authentic.
        > >
        > > Mary
      • eduardathome
        [... to establish the Divine in the human frame, to incarnate the spirit-life in the manifest form of the earthly body.] I have no doubt that humans will
        Message 3 of 9 , Feb 12, 2013
          [... to establish the Divine in the human frame, to incarnate the
          spirit-life in the manifest form of the earthly body.]

          I have no doubt that humans will evolve further .... largely of their own
          making. But I seriously doubt that one could say it is a matter of putting
          the divine into the human body.

          What is this "divine"?? Are you saying that humans would evolve to become
          gods. I should think that there would be big trouble with an earth full of
          say 10 billion gods.

          eduard


          -----Original Message-----
          From: devindersingh
          Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:06 AM
          To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [existlist] Re: significant difference

          What came out existed already there essentially within what was. It is
          nothing but the quickening of the seed, the growth of the embryo and the
          birth out of the womb: Life was imbedded in Matter, Mind was imbedded in
          Life and therefore in Matter. Thus evolution is merely self-manifestation,
          the urge to bring out step by step all the degrees of potency involved in
          the being. The force of evolution is selective and directive, as has been
          pointed out by Julian Huxley.

          With man came also the sense of what is beyond man, the superman, the divine
          man, the Divine. That is the true meaning of his appearance, that is the
          characteristic turn of consciousness which he brought with him. This
          self-consciousness, an inner perception and aspiration that he is to be
          something else, something other and greater than what he is, means the
          emergence of a spiritual soul in the world of matter. This prophetic or
          forward-looking consciousness is absent in the sub-human creation, although,
          as I have said, a secret blind unknowing forward urge has always been there
          as the original motive of all functioning in things and creatures upon
          earth.

          [Existentialists]assert even now that to be ignorant is human: to be born,
          to live and to decay and die – sasyam iva pacyate sasyam iva jayate punah –
          that is the inevitable course of earthly life. If you want to be superhuman,
          you must get beyond the human frame altogether, 'not here, not here, but
          elsewhere'. That has been the burden more or less of all religions, all
          spiritual attempts and achievements so far.

          We, have said that this does not seen to lead to the right solution of the
          riddle, for it means merely a by-passing, an escape. The true solution must
          concern itself with here and now. And we have also said that the earth and
          human life are inevitably moving towards that solution, for it is that
          solution which the evolutionary urge is carrying within itself to offer to
          earth and human life, viz., to establish the Divine in the human frame, to
          incarnate the spirit-life in the manifest form of the earthly body.

          ...the red seed of the French Revolution was planted the very day when the
          Valois autocrat declared his divine right of kingship. In Russia, Lenin's
          antithesis was posited along with Peter the Great's thesis.

          ...the New Being, the Superman, will be born, whether breaking the mould
          that humanity is or reshaping it into the new pattern.

          [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-7/-46_The%20Evolutionary%20Imperative.htm]
          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
          >
          > [First one must become a conscious, well-knit, individualised being, who
          > exists in himself, by himself, independently of all his surroundings,
          > who can hear anything, read anything, see anything without changing. He
          > receives from outside only what he wants to receive; he automatically
          > refuses all that is not in conformity with his plan and nothing can
          > leave an imprint on him unless he agrees to receive the imprint. Then
          > one begins to become an individuality!]
          >
          > Nothing new there. That is what a mature person does ... avoids being
          > carrying away by distractions ... and focusing on what is important.
          >
          > However, it is also a recipe for a self-indulged isolated hermit, which is
          > not a good path to undertake.
          >
          > eduard
        • devindersingh
          GOD you do not find? No God – not at all? But why should He be found? And to own Him, what right have you? How much of yourself have you offered to Him?
          Message 4 of 9 , Feb 12, 2013
            GOD you do not find? No God – not at all? But why should He be found? And to own Him, what right have you? How much of yourself have you offered to Him? Every moment, every limb of yours, how far have you consecrated?
            Your call is merely lip-deep. You have called on Him in a slight difficulty or out of sheer curiosity, and forthwith is He to appear before you in person?
            Perhaps He does come down. But where is your eye to see?
            Seated in an abysmal, pitch-dark cave, tightly closing your eyes in addition, you cry out in a fit of restive passion and with a stupendous laugh of disdain "Where is the Sun, where is the lamp of Phoebus? No Sun, none."
            No question of freedom for one who is subdued and trampled under the feet of others. If one really wants to have a glimpse of freedom, it is not possible through mere ire, spite, disbelief, despair or at easy ease. Fitness for freedom has to be acquired. The essential requisite is yoga, arduous yoga.
            Fear not – the first step towards freedom is the consciousness of and revolt against subjection. If the ordinary life of the world is felt as the domain of a Non-God – if there be a God He cannot remain inside the wheel of this creation – if there be a Lord of this world-machine, then He must be a satanic god, a crippled god – this is the first realisation.
            Whenever you say, "Where is God? Where is He? Nowhere," that shows the commencement of your soul's awakening, however insignificant it may be. For you feel a sense of want and dissatisfaction in everything including God.
            Your denial of God is the first step towards God-realisation. One who finds fulfilment in the ordinary life and is content with and enamoured of it, one who needs nothing over and above life, is no better than a tree, a stone, an animal, a gorilla or a chimpanzee.
            Sulking, spite, denial, disrespect, constitute the first step. The second step is a calm expectation, a persistent faith, one-pointed love and devotion and a complete reliance.
            [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-7/-35_Where%20is%20God.htm]
            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
            >
            > [... to establish the Divine in the human frame, to incarnate the
            > spirit-life in the manifest form of the earthly body.]
            >
            > I have no doubt that humans will evolve further .... largely of their own
            > making. But I seriously doubt that one could say it is a matter of putting
            > the divine into the human body.
            >
            > What is this "divine"?? Are you saying that humans would evolve to become
            > gods. I should think that there would be big trouble with an earth full of
            > say 10 billion gods.
            >
            > eduard

            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: devindersingh
            > Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:06 AM
            > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [existlist] Re: significant difference
            >
            > What came out existed already there essentially within what was. It is
            > nothing but the quickening of the seed, the growth of the embryo and the
            > birth out of the womb: Life was imbedded in Matter, Mind was imbedded in
            > Life and therefore in Matter. Thus evolution is merely self-manifestation,
            > the urge to bring out step by step all the degrees of potency involved in
            > the being. The force of evolution is selective and directive, as has been
            > pointed out by Julian Huxley.
            >
            > With man came also the sense of what is beyond man, the superman, the divine
            > man, the Divine. That is the true meaning of his appearance, that is the
            > characteristic turn of consciousness which he brought with him. This
            > self-consciousness, an inner perception and aspiration that he is to be
            > something else, something other and greater than what he is, means the
            > emergence of a spiritual soul in the world of matter. This prophetic or
            > forward-looking consciousness is absent in the sub-human creation, although,
            > as I have said, a secret blind unknowing forward urge has always been there
            > as the original motive of all functioning in things and creatures upon
            > earth.
            >
            > [Existentialists]assert even now that to be ignorant is human: to be born,
            > to live and to decay and die â€" sasyam iva pacyate sasyam iva jayate punah â€"
            > that is the inevitable course of earthly life. If you want to be superhuman,
            > you must get beyond the human frame altogether, 'not here, not here, but
            > elsewhere'. That has been the burden more or less of all religions, all
            > spiritual attempts and achievements so far.
            >
            > We, have said that this does not seen to lead to the right solution of the
            > riddle, for it means merely a by-passing, an escape. The true solution must
            > concern itself with here and now. And we have also said that the earth and
            > human life are inevitably moving towards that solution, for it is that
            > solution which the evolutionary urge is carrying within itself to offer to
            > earth and human life, viz., to establish the Divine in the human frame, to
            > incarnate the spirit-life in the manifest form of the earthly body.
            >
            > ...the red seed of the French Revolution was planted the very day when the
            > Valois autocrat declared his divine right of kingship. In Russia, Lenin's
            > antithesis was posited along with Peter the Great's thesis.
            >
            > ...the New Being, the Superman, will be born, whether breaking the mould
            > that humanity is or reshaping it into the new pattern.
            >
            > [http://sriaurobindoashram.com/Content.aspx?ContentURL=_StaticContent/SriAurobindoAshram/-09%20E-Library/-03%20Disciples/Nolini%20Kanta%20Gupta/Volume-7/-46_The%20Evolutionary%20Imperative.htm]
            > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
            > >
            > > [First one must become a conscious, well-knit, individualised being, who
            > > exists in himself, by himself, independently of all his surroundings,
            > > who can hear anything, read anything, see anything without changing. He
            > > receives from outside only what he wants to receive; he automatically
            > > refuses all that is not in conformity with his plan and nothing can
            > > leave an imprint on him unless he agrees to receive the imprint. Then
            > > one begins to become an individuality!]
            > >
            > > Nothing new there. That is what a mature person does ... avoids being
            > > carrying away by distractions ... and focusing on what is important.
            > >
            > > However, it is also a recipe for a self-indulged isolated hermit, which is
            > > not a good path to undertake.
            > >
            > > eduard
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.